I'm a native of Atlanta (and yes, I mean inside the city limits Atlanta).

We've lived in the city limits. We lived in a loft downtown for a while right after we got married, and then we had a really nice, large basement apartment in Virginia-Highlands. We loved living in the city, but man, it is expensive! We moved on back to my hometown when our son was born. We head back down there for the nightlife when we can.

So am I reading right that the fastest frame rate when shooting RAW will be 1 fps? If true I find that more troubling than any other aspect. Thanks for the hard work, Adam, I'm thinking you burned the candle at both ends the last few days?

So am I reading right that the fastest frame rate when shooting RAW will be 1 fps? If true I find that more troubling than any other aspect. Thanks for the hard work, Adam, I'm thinking you burned the candle at both ends the last few days?

Where are you reading that? Please attach a link to the test or paragraph of the review..

Just a word on these lens shade devices. I bought a similar model which by the description sound great. One big problem. In bright sunlight, you still can not see the LCD because your face is glowing and shines right onto the LCD. It actually is no different than not having it at all. Just my experience. I now have a hoodman which is a bit of a pain but does work better. The LCDVF seems to be the best implementation of this so far.

@monochrome- I screwed up and put this in the wrong thread, sorry folks. But to your question it's in the "drive modes" chapter. I quote "In Continuous Lo mode, the camera shoots at 3FPS and has an unlimited buffer for JPEGs. Depending on your card writing speed, the framerate may decrease slightly along the way until all data is written out. If you're shooting in RAW, then the framerate falls to 1FPS, but the buffer size is still unlimited." I'll add this post to the "review" thread and we can let this thread on shade devices be....

@monochrome- I screwed up and put this in the wrong thread, sorry folks. But to your question it's in the "drive modes" chapter. I quote "In Continuous Lo mode, the camera shoots at 3FPS and has an unlimited buffer for JPEGs. Depending on your card writing speed, the framerate may decrease slightly along the way until all data is written out. If you're shooting in RAW, then the framerate falls to 1FPS, but the buffer size is still unlimited." I'll add this post to the "review" thread and we can let this thread on shade devices be....

Thanks for clarifying. I had scanned quickly through the Review and couldn't find it). Fortunately I'll likely never shoot this camera in AF.C - when I expect to need that function I'll carry a dSLR. I also a fast HD Video card for this camera.

My daughter thinks shooting more than three consecutive frames in AF.C - even for fast sports - indicates lack of confidence and/or skill. FWIW, she was instructed in high school and college by (among others) leading SI photographers, though a decade ago and on film. I still wince in fear of her biting comment whenever I hold the shutter release down .

My daughter thinks shooting more than three consecutive frames in AF.C - even for fast sports - indicates lack of confidence and/or skill. FWIW, she was instructed in high school and college by (among others) leading SI photographers, though a decade ago and on film. I still wince in fear of her biting comment whenever I hold the shutter release down .

To add to this, in my one photography class at the university level back in the film days, the professor only touched briefly on sports photography, but I clearly remember that she was quite dismissive of motor drives and what she called "spray and pray" . I've heard that term many times since, especially since the digital era began. And I was very amused to see Scott Kelby recommend the technique to newbies in his first Digital Photography Handbook, and not just for sports photography! He tells us to use it anytime there's a lot of movement going on because, to paraphrase, if you hold down that shutter button and get a whole bunch of pictures at once, even if you're not sure exactly what it is you're shooting, you're bound to get one or two useable photos out of the lot.

To add to this, in my one photography class at the university level back in the film days, the professor only touched briefly on sports photography, but I clearly remember that she was quite dismissive of motor drives and what she called "spray and pray" . I've heard that term many times since, especially since the digital era began. And I was very amused to see Scott Kelby recommend the technique to newbies in his first Digital Photography Handbook, and not just for sports photography! He tells us to use it anytime there's a lot of movement going on because, to paraphrase, if you hold down that shutter button and get a whole bunch of pictures at once, even if you're not sure exactly what it is you're shooting, you're bound to get one or two useable photos out of the lot.

She was tauight to learn the sport, anticpate the action, preset the exposure, position herself, zone focus, touch up and shoot the eyes. Photo Journalism at her public (USA meaning) High School was pretty competitive nationally - they brought in pros who taught before a game and then juried after (many of them graduates or referred by graduates). She became Photography Editor, then Editor-in-Chief, went on to college Media Production and ended up in network news production. She started with K1000's and my KX.

Not saying anybody is right or wrong - but I probably will have zero issues with a slow frame rate.

She was tauight to learn the sport, anticpate the action, preset the exposure, position herself, zone focus, touch up and shoot the eyes. Photo Journalism at her public (USA meaning) High School was pretty competitive nationally - they brought in pros who taught before a game and then juried after (many of them graduates or referred by graduates). She became Photography Editor, then Editor-in-Chief, went on to college Media Production and ended up in network news production. She started with K1000's and my KX.

Not saying anybody is right or wrong - but I probably will have zero issues with a slow frame rate.

Pretty cool High School, though.

Very cool high school

I shot high school sports from 73-77 or so, and she learned to do it pretty much the same way i did. It was always easier for me to shoot a sport i plated myself (Soccer,Football,Skiing, Rugger, Hockey) than ti was to shoot the ones i had little interest in (Cricket,Tennis,Squash, Gymnastics, Basketball - I'd add baseball but we had no baseball in our school Cricket was the alternate - i played it a couple of years but never got interested in it)
I started on a Zenit and finished on a Nikon f photomic - no zoom lenses on any of them 200mm was the biggest i had at the end at the beginning i used a slow (3.5) 135 with a 2 X TC

Well, having read Adam's review - including his summary of the rear LCD's performance in bright light - I must reluctantly conclude that the K-01 isn't for me. But that's okay: I still have the K-5 and the older K200D, both of which work fine. But I look forward to other cameras in the K-01 line... perhaps they will have a built-in EVF and/or a tiling rear LCD.

Ebay has quite a few accessory hoods and gadgets, just set your search filter and charge in. My solution is a long-bill cap, however, Adam's desert maybe brighter than mine.

I plan on K-01 being my goto camera for this months work trip to Europe. Why? you ask ... because it's IQ is the best I own.
All the rest are features I can work around or avoid, albeit cussing at some of the form-fit-function choices in firmware. That'l change no doubt.

My photo essay "The saga of the black cat in a coal hole at midnight" can wait.

It's funny how bad I want this camera, despite its several shortcomings (for my needs/wants.) I found myself wondering, after reading about the low light focusing difficulties, that perhaps I could use this great focus peeking and just shoot it as a manual focus camera. Then I'd be almost exactly where I was shooting college sports in 1993 w/ my fm2 with manual film advance, 100mm 2.8 (I now own the 70 ltd 2.4) , shooting tmax 3200. Somebody smack me.